So He made a simulation with quadrillion galaxies?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
How Can an Atheist Reject a Simulated Realities CPU?
- Thread starter wizanda
- Start date
Plus the 13th Floor, The Truman Show, Logan's Run, Dark City, Source Code, etc... Always looking for more?
The simulation is because nothing exists otherwise, reality would just be splodge of raw chaotic quantum entanglement; thus one clever spark decided to create Oneness (Heaven), and that by cooperation, we could manifest a playground together.
Abrahamic intelligent design is for kindergarten; we're talking about the quantum physics, allows for atomic structuring, that allows for anything to exist; this in its self is intelligent by design, else it could not exist in such complexities.
The simulation isn't artificial, it is real; it is to give us an existence in a structured reality.
Life drives the equations taking place within the Matrix; that is then accumulated, and processed by the CPU.
Personally question if the simulation was created within side its self, thus the big bang was a formatting of reality to have structure, that beings could exist within.
The whole reality is part of the computer, so the physical matter is hard drives, with the Heaven's being like memory, thus we're talking about a infinite scope of perception.
The question is a logical hypothesis based on reasoning, to see if people are logical on answering the riddle; because people are argumentative, and a individual group has been specified, they will argue against logic to prove themselves right.
In my opinion.
I'd say that, simply put, the video doesn't understand the 'observer' need not be a person, but can be anything with which the (in this case) photon interacts eg the detectors.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
Plus the 13th Floor, The Truman Show, Logan's Run, Dark City, Source Code, etc... Always looking for more?
The simulation is because nothing exists otherwise, reality would just be splodge of raw chaotic quantum entanglement; thus one clever spark decided to create Oneness (Heaven), and that by cooperation, we could manifest a playground together.
Abrahamic intelligent design is for kindergarten; we're talking about the quantum physics, allows for atomic structuring, that allows for anything to exist; this in its self is intelligent by design, else it could not exist in such complexities.
The simulation isn't artificial, it is real; it is to give us an existence in a structured reality.
Life drives the equations taking place within the Matrix; that is then accumulated, and processed by the CPU.
Personally question if the simulation was created within side its self, thus the big bang was a formatting of reality to have structure, that beings could exist within.
The whole reality is part of the computer, so the physical matter is hard drives, with the Heaven's being like memory, thus we're talking about a infinite scope of perception.
The question is a logical hypothesis based on reasoning, to see if people are logical on answering the riddle; because people are argumentative, and a individual group has been specified, they will argue against logic to prove themselves right.
In my opinion.
Perhaps intelligence is emergent, perhaps it's always been. But the existence of it seems to have a dimensionality all it's own where functionality happens purposefully with intention. So the universal memory bank is constantly collecting information by relation, and perhaps it's characterizing and classifying information as well. And then information takes on form and shape according to intention. So at the heart of existence is information, that with relation takes on substance. Or we start with substance that forms information, and information developes memory, and then emerged intelligence.
So by nature existence started out mindless, or mindful. And nobody has ever found out which is true. Information could arise from cause and effect, forming bonds and relationships of substances, and as relationships advance intelligence emerged from memory.
Something seemed off in the OP.
I may have stumbled on a part of the reason why: it confuses the ability to imagine reality as a simulation with some form of duty to do so.
It also seems to fall into the common yet strange mistake of finding it useful or even necessary to "teach" atheists that we "should" believe in God's existence.
I may have stumbled on a part of the reason why: it confuses the ability to imagine reality as a simulation with some form of duty to do so.
It also seems to fall into the common yet strange mistake of finding it useful or even necessary to "teach" atheists that we "should" believe in God's existence.
osgart
Nothing my eye, Something for sure
People think in two categories here, mindless existence, vs mindful existence; so people attach mindfulness to information vs. Information used as an abstract concept to characterize data mindlessly existing.
So there are brute fact existence thinkers, or purposed intention existence thinkers on the subject of simulation.
So what is a brute fact mindlessly existing simulation?. Doesn't simulation imply an intellect?
So there are brute fact existence thinkers, or purposed intention existence thinkers on the subject of simulation.
So what is a brute fact mindlessly existing simulation?. Doesn't simulation imply an intellect?
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Yeah what is it simulating? Are we a simulation of our creator's reality or a mere science lab experiment accidentally left on in a closet?
The more sophisticated our own computer modelling becomes the more like our own reality our virtual simulations can become. Is a computer program which allows you to explore the two dimensional Mandelbrot Set exploring an objective reality or creating a fictional world?
When our virtual realities contain more space than our non-virtual natural one will we be in a self-created universe?
Frankly I have no idea how the universe can be a simulation. What is happening in a computer is a series of electrical voltage fluctuations. These voltage fluctuations are being interpreted by us in a certain way depending on the context of the program. It's very difficult to see how a discrete series of ON/OFF voltage signals can be thought of as a universe under ANY condition of future development.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
What is more difficult to explain a chaos of formless energy or a void?
What we are dealing with here is the mystery of being. Why does anything exist at all? What is to stop something to come into existence if nothing exists to stop it?
It is as likely that such questions form in the human brain because of the nature of how the human brain works. The human brain runs a simulation of reality called the human mind. The human mind is a product of the universe.
We are all flies stuck on a Mobius strip of the mind creates the Universe creates the mind creates the Universe creates...
What we are dealing with here is the mystery of being. Why does anything exist at all? What is to stop something to come into existence if nothing exists to stop it?
It is as likely that such questions form in the human brain because of the nature of how the human brain works. The human brain runs a simulation of reality called the human mind. The human mind is a product of the universe.
We are all flies stuck on a Mobius strip of the mind creates the Universe creates the mind creates the Universe creates...
HonestJoe
Well-Known Member
I’d say it would be illogical for anyone to not accept that there could be a CPU that creates the reality we are within. That doesn’t really get us anywhere though, because the list of things that could be is literally infinite.
Not quite. Many atheists have always been open to possibilities. The issue with attributing a specific label is the implication of knowing there is such a being and it’s specific characteristics and preferences. The distinction remains fairly clear between philosophical speculation and theistic doctrine.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Think about virtual realities and computer simulation models for the weather, etc...
Quantum physics with it's discrete states could suggest that there is an underlying digital quality to our analog experience.
I think the idea is elegant to consider given all of the deep questions it raises. It could be a useful tool for understanding our subjectivity.
What you are thinking about is the image on the screen. It's an illusion like a painting made for easier interpretation. The image is a set of casually disconnected pixels of light created out of the voltage fluctuations occuring in the CPU.
"We can entertain this idea" <> "we should entertain this idea"
Why should we be taking this as a given?
Guy Threepwood
Mighty Pirate
Maybe just personal experience, but it doesn't seem that long ago that ID was dismissed out of hand by atheists by any definition- as an inherently 'supernatural' belief. the universe and life came about by purely natural unguided mechanisms, and there are still plenty atheists on this forum who argue this position.
I consider myself a theist and I'd say I fit into your philosophical speculation definition- I don't say God IS, I acknowledge my belief, faith as such, specific characteristics are things we can speculate on, we can make fairly logical deductions on some things, but likewise cannot know
Which is fine, but the extra point about time being rewinded because of an observer (conscious or not) adds to the video's point. What other object or process known in material physics can travel back in time to change its state for it's whole existence?
Last edited:
So He made a simulation with quadrillion galaxies?
Most likely he did not.
Simulations cheat and "render" to an observer. If you play 3d games, the computer in simulating every object in respect to the observer but it only renders physically to the screen what can be seen by the observer. A multiplayer game is the same process applied to multiple observers. The simulation does not need to compute every aspect of its universe not being observed. When objects come into observation, then the simulation can interpolate the current states.
I'm not saying this is proof. I'm just saying it is plausible. Personally, I just find it interesting because I'm a computer engineer but it's still far away from anything to suggest of our universe and existence.
You are making the points for that of a simulation. Our universe is quantized with finite values which is the same analogy you are making. It is an illusion that our reality is continuous.
Intelligence can be demonstrated to be an emergent property. That's not much evidence that it's always or only an emergent property.
But at this point, we have no way to identify any other kind of intelligence. It's not really even possible to define intelligence with much objectivity or precision. Our scientific methods and tools just aren't up to that yet.
That doesn't mean that they never will.
Tom
That's because most people do not know what simulation theory is. I've tried posting a youtube video as a primer and yet people are still jumping to conclusions about what it postulates.
Folks are jumping beyond the simulation straight to a creator. The simulation theory never suggests any type of creator or its motive. It strictly focuses on the simulation.
Could it be???? That even a complex simulation built on top of complex "HW" could come into existence by its own? It's the same questions and conflicts all over again with ID.
sealchan
Well-Known Member
Yes but the more you push forward the understanding of the human body and the mind that arises from it and the more we are able to simulate the conscious experience of reality (which, it could be argued, is what the brain is doing), the more the difference between the two becomes less meaningful.
Sure we can trace back in history to a time before people became plugged into a self-created simulation and just assumed that reality is what they see. But what if that history doesn't exist because the creature was formed within the simulation?
To me the challenge of this question is to generate a principled answer for deciding the truth or falsity of the question, because right now it seems to me it is more a matter of sufficient technology to either make possible or demonstrate it is impossible. In the latter case there would be some scientific principle to fall out of an engineering failure.
Studies in chaos theory and complex adaptive systems are beginning to show that quiet complex and "non-computable" behavior can arise out of relatively simple but very sensitive to initial conditions systems.
Now consider the notion that some scientists are creating black holes in a laboratory environment. What if they were to create proto-universes? And what if scientific principles were found that allowed you to manipulate the fundamental constants of that proto-Universe? Could we not potentially be a microscopic simulation in the lab of some level of reality which could put our whole Universe on a thumb drive?